Now that there are all of four votes, there's nothing wrong with picking the first option. I'll disagree, but at least we wouldn't be arguing about something completely retarded like, "the Tigers made the playoffs so Cabrera was more valuable."

1) Whether Mike Trout is the best, most complete baseball player on this continent. If you're one of the holdouts who is keeping that sentiment from being unanimous, you need to get out of your cocoon and watch this guy play a little more closely."

I'll take the guy with 10 points of OBP and 79 points of slugging, thanks. 33 steals at 82.5% success rate is good, not elite, not enough to make up that kind of differential with the bat. His fielding wasn't nearly as good this season as last.

Somehow BBR calculates a higher oWAR for Trout. That **** has got to be broken, even with consideration for park factors. Cabrera had a much better offensive WPA.

Miggy with RISP - .397/.529/.782 - something like the 4th or 5th consecutive season he has improved his contact rate with RISP.

Trout was also pretty damn good with RISP, but after being worse with RISP last year it's not a big enough sample size for me to lend it the same sort of credibility. But I know he did also hit about .325 with RISP with an OBP over .400 and a SLG in the .500s, which are pretty solid RISP numbers even for elite bats. Not Miguel Cabrera/Chris Davis good this year, but still really good.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/14/2013 7:25:00 PM (view original):Now that there are all of four votes, there's nothing wrong with picking the first option. I'll disagree, but at least we wouldn't be arguing about something completely retarded like, "the Tigers made the playoffs so Cabrera was more valuable."

It's a hard argument to understand when you don't understand the meaning of the word "value," I agree.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/15/2013 8:24:00 AM (view original):FWIW, a better case could have been made for Trout last year, as his team won 89 games; one more win than Cabrera's team.

This season, it's difficult to make a case for an "MVP" coming from a team with a losing record.

Sure. Trout having better teammates last year definitely made him more valuable than he was this year, when his teammates sucked.

This is funny.

I knew what BL was trying to do when he started this thread. Now I wonder if tec knows and is sucking BL into the argument that BL desperately wants or if tec has been sucked into BL's argument unwittingly.

I suppose you could surround Trout with 24 replacement level players, have Trout put up his 2013 numbers (minus the runs and RBIs), watch the Angels win 35 games, and argue that Trout was SO MUCH BETTER than everybody else on his team, he deserves MVP.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/15/2013 10:53:00 AM (view original):I suppose you could surround Trout with 24 replacement level players, have Trout put up his 2013 numbers (minus the runs and RBIs), watch the Angels win 35 games, and argue that Trout was SO MUCH BETTER than everybody else on his team, he deserves MVP.

Right?

How good Trout (or any position player) is has nothing to do with how good the players on the rest of his team are.